Meh. If they don't want to update, it's their loss. Perhaps they simply don't understand what the update does.

I think a lot of people view it as a maintenance type of thing, and they decide since it's working fine as it is, they won't need to shell out $10 for nothing.

I actually think most people are just happy with the way things are. I have noticed changes to my iPhone and I would always upgrade but I upgraded my wife's iPhone and I'm not sure if she knows it. Were I to ask her if I should upgrade she would probably answer 'whatever'. So ten bucks? For what? in most people's eyes, me thinks. The thing works fine as it is.

I paid the USD 10 for the update (well, EUR8) on my iPod touch 2G.
Bluetooth is poorly implemented. Exciting new features like the voice command is not featured on the iPod \.

My iPod touch seems slower and is going hot now .

To say bluetooth is poorly implemented is gross understatement! It is flat out terrible .. I have tried 3 different sets of blutooth headphones, and one set of speakers, and the ipod will not remain connected to them for more than about 30 seconds.

>>>>>Therefore, should Apple be compelled to treat iPod touches like iPhones and Apple TVs, it may need to make a similar disclosure to the one it made for the aforementioned two products back in 2007. >>>>>

Are YOU saying that to save apple an accounting thingy they must make the itouch un-gaap-able. Again why do the Itouch have to pay when the iphonies do not. Apple could issue a ten dollar itunes credit or something.

I don't have an iPod Touch yet, but am thinking of getting one when they update them. While I'd probably pay the $10 to get the upgrade, I can really see how this paid upgrade pisses off the iPod Touch user. After all, I have a Mac Pro and a Mac Book Pro, and I don't pay anything for the dozens of updates that they receive via Software Update, why should I have to pay for an update that iPhone users don't pay for. As many here say, it sounds like an Apple cash grab to me. Even with the stupid law that requires them to, like others have said, why is it $10, why couldn't it be $1 or $2?

The revenue accounting treatment for iPhone & AppleTV vs. iPod has nothing to do with SOx.

It is due to US GAAP on the following:

SAB 104 vs SOP 97.2

To make it simple, Revenue can only be recognized once the service has been performed. if one has to provide software update down the road, it means that at the time of purchase, the product was not fully delivered to the buyer thus revenue should not be recognized. US GAAP allowed to recognized a certain percentage if the seller is able to forecast a percentage of completion.

By recognizing the revenue on a subscription basis, Apple is saying that the product is not fully delivered at the time of sell. it is to simplify their accounting.

iPhone 3.0 jailbreak wasn't out until mid-Friday and the unlock until mid-Tuesday. And smart people usually wait a couple of days for bugs the dev team just can't catch.

So no, the numbers are pretty reasonable.

I know there's a lot of talk about jailbreaking and such but, let's just be honest here, the % of the community that has a jailbroken phone has to be less than (at most) 10% so I really don't think it plays that significant of a factor in terms of 3.0 adoption.

If its used primarily for music (a truly poor expenditure of money for what has to be the worst ergonomic-al iPod made) then why upgrade. I use my Touch as a PDA. Its the best PDA I've ever owned and I've had dozens of them. No it won't do excel spreadsheets, crash while editing 4 meg photos or load a multitude of frustratingly poor apps. What it can do is work.

To me, the landscape keyboard alone was worth the $10. The apps that offer this utility are worthless and crash. Apple's approach works. And its that continuing development that I'm willing to pay for. Apple makes a boatload of recurring fee money on the phone. Its fair and appropriate that Touch users should have a choice of paying for enhancements they will use or choosing not to.

If you know where to look the 3.0 firmware update is available to download for free legally, from Apple's own site. You then just need to force a restore in iTunes and select the .ipfw file you just downloaded. All perfectly legal and above board. The fact that Apple makes it so easy to get the firmware for free from its own servers is a strong indicator that the $10 charge is forced on them by law and not just a money grabbing excercise.

I'm one of those in the minority that did decide to spend the $10 and upgrade the firmware on two 1st generation iPod Touch models--an 8GB unit belonging to my dad and a 32GB unit that I bought at a serious closeout price cut the last time new iPod Touch models came out.

I haven't really noticed much of a difference on the iPod Touch hardware that I have. iPod Touch firmware 2.2.1 behaved pretty well identically, and I know that in places I had access to a landscape keyboard. (It showed up during Safari use at least.) Of course, it can't take advantage of some of the most touted features, so that's not entirely surprising. But operating speed for everything I do (browse the web with Safari, watch transcoded videos from DVD, run a very few apps) really seems to be unchanged. I upgraded because of security fixes in 3.0, something that I thought to be at least somewhat important.

The $10 fee kind of bugs me, although the fact that I can apply the upgrade to all the iPod Touch units I have is more than fair enough. I don't know what Apple actually does with the fee, but I like to think that the developers saw at least a little bit of that money.

the problem is really bigger than a simple idea that apple is doing this to make money. In fact, apple, being a Consumer Electronics Company, has every intention of selling hardware and giving the software (tools) to sell it away. So, the SEC legal rumblings are not untrue - but rather complicated. The stock price alone, might be 50% higher at this moment if wall street recognized the true earnings of the company. Don't forget, ATT is paying them up front the 350.00 plus per phone and it could be recognized in the quarter report instead of amortized over 720 days. As hard to believe as it is - wall street does not recognize all that cash as profit until it is shown as actual profit divided out over the life (720 days) of the phone. This is not ideal for apple, investors or ipod touch users. However, you can't skin a cat two ways in this case - as the relationship with ATT is with a subscription model. Apple did not invent it - and in fact started out selling their phones for full price without it. However, the phone business requires the subscription model to be successful (see competition). So, can anyone bitching about the $10.00 stop and realize you can't have a subscription model with the phone (software free) and then give it away with the touch for free without a subscription model. it isn't rocket science. it is business and following the complex legal requirements of the SEC and public markets we invest in. AS it is, the SEC has enough corruption and cheating to go around for everyone. Do you think Apple should just not follow the law to keep your little hearts happy? Well, they are not following the law to make $10!!!

The $10 has to show fair value for what is set up in the subscription model for upgrades. it is called a standard. it has to be reasonable and not subject to question. In fact, it is much harder to justify $10 than $20 and not the other way around with giving it away for a dollar as some suggest here as solutions (see you in jail). AGAIN.. Apple did not invent the subscription model. If any other company comes out with a two product line up - phone and touch example, they will have to do some very fancy accounting to avoid what is already a standard in accounting practices with similar circumstances to what Apple has encountered. AGAIN.. APPLE DIDN'T COME UP WITH THIS PLAN ON PURPOSE - THEY CAME UP WITH IT BECAUSE THEY HAD NO CHOICE WITH A SUBSCRIPTION BUSINESS FORMAT THAT HAPPENS TO CROSS OVER INTO THE IPOD TOUCH PRODUCT USING THE SAME SOFTWARE.

DO YOU REALLY THINK APPLE COULD GIVE A CRAP ABOUT THE $10?.. WHAT THEY WANT TO DO IS SELL HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE. THE NAME AFTER APPLE IS "CONSUMER ELECTRONICS" .. ARE YOU ALL JUST STUCK IN A COMPUTER MIND SET OR CAN YOU ADAPT TO WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON NOW FOR OVER TWO YEARS?

One thing I haven't seen anyone bring up. Apple doesn't realize all the sales from the iPhone until two years after it is sold. This allows Apple to justify free updates for the iPhone. So, now that we are getting pretty close to two years for the original iPhone, does that mean that they will stop providing free software for those iPhones?

Wait, why the heck have only half the iPhone users upgraded??? It's free and it makes your iPhone do everything noticeably faster - not to mention all the added features.

I know some users who are not in a hurry to upgrade their iPhone software to 3.0 because it reverse their software modifications - hack - that allows them to run music and software other than iTunes downloads. I doubt it is half the iPhones are hacked.

I think in most cases it is inertia. The current software works fine and folks are too busy to mess with downloads. I get free updates for the MacOS and I take my time to install them. Same with the Windows PCs that I use at work, especially those running specialized software. In the office I want to make sure the updates do not crash my other programs... can not afford the down time.

If its used primarily for music (a truly poor expenditure of money for what has to be the worst ergonomic-al iPod made) then why upgrade. I use my Touch as a PDA. Its the best PDA I've ever owned and I've had dozens of them. No it won't do excel spreadsheets, crash while editing 4 meg photos or load a multitude of frustratingly poor apps. What it can do is work.

To me, the landscape keyboard alone was worth the $10. The apps that offer this utility are worthless and crash. Apple's approach works. And its that continuing development that I'm willing to pay for. Apple makes a boatload of recurring fee money on the phone. Its fair and appropriate that Touch users should have a choice of paying for enhancements they will use or choosing not to.

I agree... and software doesn't just fall from the sky. There are obviously people getting paid to do this work. They still make money from the iPhone, so it's not "free" unless you consider paying a subscription fee "free."

Once you bought the iPod you stopped paying for it, no monthly fees. So, for doing a lot of programming and etc. on the Apple employee's part, it seems reasonable to me to charge money for a new product.

I also use my iPod as a PDA. With the app "Things" and the desktop equivalent (sync-able to-do lists), this thing is awesome for organization.

Spotlight alone was was $10 to me. Being able to search my Mail, rather than scrolling through email after email, probably skipping the one I'm looking for, is awesome.

The revenue accounting treatment for iPhone & AppleTV vs. iPod has nothing to do with SOx.

It is due to US GAAP on the following:

SAB 104 vs SOP 97.2

To make it simple, Revenue can only be recognized once the service has been performed. if one has to provide software update down the road, it means that at the time of purchase, the product was not fully delivered to the buyer thus revenue should not be recognized. US GAAP allowed to recognized a certain percentage if the seller is able to forecast a percentage of completion.

By recognizing the revenue on a subscription basis, Apple is saying that the product is not fully delivered at the time of sell. it is to simplify their accounting.

Thanks for the first sane post on this issue here.

Tim Cook is gay, believes in climate change, and cares deeply about racial equality. Deal with it (and please spare us if you can't).

I think that AdMob's statistics are highly misleading, and I'm one good example of why I think that's so. As soon as the iPod 3.0 iPod Touch upgrade's availability was announced, I attempted to purchase it and download it. I have been trying for eight (8!) days to download that miserable piece of software. Several e-mails to customer support and a phone call to Apple have not helped. The last guy I talked to told me to give up trying for a week, and then, maybe, I'd be able to download it.

So, I bought it, I paid for it, but AdMob won't find it on my iPod Touch because iTunes won't give it to me.

Adding to my frustration, I have been able to purchase and download new programs and upgrades to existing programs during this time -- I just can't access the 3.0 software. Right now I've got four upgraded apps that won't run on my iPod Touch because I don't have the upgrade installed.

I didn't upgrade because I plan on buying the new iPod Touch in September.

Also, Apple isn't charging $10 so they can milk their customers. They are better served having everyone on 3.0 and making life easier for developers.

This is US accounting laws, pure and simple. (And no, you can't charge 99 cents or a penny either under this law. It must be "fair market value as measured against complementary or like products.")

Given Microsoft announced OS upgrades today from $229 - $449, 10 bucks is low as measured against this standard. Again, it's not your opinion of what is fair or low, but accounting rules. A mobile device is just a form of computer in the eyes of GAAP.

Anyway, I look forward to a new iPod Touch in September. I hope we see 64gb.

I paid for the v2.0 because it added a feature (the app store) that, to me, was worth the money. However, most of the v3.0 features are really only useful to iPhone users. I won't be upgrading.

While I admit it's not a slam-dunk, i think you are being a tad disingenuous here.

I was talking "computers" (Apple is formerly and still primarily a computer company), not "consumer devices. Cell phones (traditionally or traditional models at least), and the iPod classic are not really in this category for starters. You do have a point with the Apple TV. I didn't think of that device when I made my comments and it now makes me wonder if they are going to do some kind of content subscription model with that eventually. In any case, despite the fact that the Apple TV *is* a computer, most of it's users probably don't think of it as one.

Things like iPods are right on the bubble in that we never used to really think of them as "computers" per se, but now (especially with the iPod touch we do. Also, having owned many many PDAs I can tell you that OS upgrades for them as a category are most definitely not always free. It's such a big category that covers so much history and so many devices that you can't rally say much about that at all, at least not in such general terms.

The comparison between the iPod touch and an iMac that I made is (IMO) much, much closer to reality than the examples you gave, in that both of these things actually run OS-X, but with one running a modified, slightly dumbed down variety. Clearly it won't be long before the horsepower of these mobiles and the OS they run is virtually identical to the desktop machines as well.

My argument therefore is more that since the iPod touch is the first device in a new mobile computing platform, (that doesn't use the subscription model like the iPhone), if Apple allowed the updates to be for free, it would most definitely reflect on their desktop line.

Especially now people are getting used to lower and lower prices for OS updates (a new development being pushed almost entirely by Apple BTW), if they start giving them away for free, it won't long at all before people start to wonder why they have to pay for an OS update at all.

Concomitant to that, I would argue that it's just rude for people to complain about this given the incredible amount of work that goes into the update, the ridiculously *low* price that Apple is charging, the fact that Apple is in fact leading the way to lower and lower prices all the time, the fact that the last time people complained the price was cut in half, the likelihood that the price might be lowered even further, and the fact that Apple purposely leaves their servers open so people can basically rip it off and distribute it for free on teh Internets (if you're that kind of person that likes to rip stuff off.

I understand why people are confused by the whole thing, but just because a lot of stupid people cry like babies about it doesn't make me feel sympathetic.

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

I can see the advantages of the iPhone 3G S, it really is a nice upgrade (better camera, video recording, faster hardware), but as an iPod Touch 2G user... the benefits really don't add to much (this is personal opinion based on the usage of my iPod, others may disagree as they have different needs). I don't really like landscape mode as I've already come used to portrait, spotlight search is no useful for me as I have all the applications I need on the first two homepages, which means I've got no use for two extra homepages...

...I'm not cheap, it's just that that my iPod doesn't have the hardware to take the advantages I would need/like of OS 3, so for me, it's just not worth paying for things I'm rarely gonna use if at all...

The $10 fee kind of bugs me, although the fact that I can apply the upgrade to all the iPod Touch units I have is more than fair enough. I don't know what Apple actually does with the fee, but I like to think that the developers saw at least a little bit of that money.

Why would Apple be giving money to developers?! This is an upgrade that Apple worked on.

I'm amazed that AppleInsider or one of the other major gadget sites hasn't picked up on the problems Touch customers are having with the 3.0 upgrade. Maybe that's why there's been such a slow adoption rate. I wish I had waited. Check Apple's support websites and see all the issues people currently have with 3.0 "bricking" their units, wireless problems, connectivity problems with once working automobile interfaces, totally unpredictable behaviors, the list goes on and on. Try this link to see for yourself: http://discussions.apple.com/categor...tart=0#threads. That's just one of 10 that I've searched trying to find a solution.

Add in the fact that there is no clear way to downgrade back to 2.x.x and the user community is beside itself. Whether you go to a MINI or BMW or other interface providers' forum communities, everyone is screaming about the upgrade causing these units to stop functioning normally. Fortunately, I only updated two of my three Touch's so I have one that I can still utilize. My 3GS iphone works fine with V3, but nothing else does.

I think this release needs an immediate fix or a clear, workable way to downgrade the software, and Apple should refund everyone's $10 purely as a gesture of apology for releasing this bag of dirt called an upgrade.

the problem is really bigger than a simple idea that apple is doing this to make money. In fact, apple, being a Consumer Electronics Company, has every intention of selling hardware and giving the software (tools) to sell it away. So, the SEC legal rumblings are not untrue - but rather complicated. The stock price alone, might be 50% higher at this moment if wall street recognized the true earnings of the company. Don't forget, ATT is paying them up front the 350.00 plus per phone and it could be recognized in the quarter report instead of amortized over 720 days. As hard to believe as it is - wall street does not recognize all that cash as profit until it is shown as actual profit divided out over the life (720 days) of the phone. This is not ideal for apple, investors or ipod touch users. However, you can't skin a cat two ways in this case - as the relationship with ATT is with a subscription model. Apple did not invent it - and in fact started out selling their phones for full price without it. However, the phone business requires the subscription model to be successful (see competition). So, can anyone bitching about the $10.00 stop and realize you can't have a subscription model with the phone (software free) and then give it away with the touch for free without a subscription model. it isn't rocket science. it is business and following the complex legal requirements of the SEC and public markets we invest in. AS it is, the SEC has enough corruption and cheating to go around for everyone. Do you think Apple should just not follow the law to keep your little hearts happy? Well, they are not following the law to make $10!!!

The $10 has to show fair value for what is set up in the subscription model for upgrades. it is called a standard. it has to be reasonable and not subject to question. In fact, it is much harder to justify $10 than $20 and not the other way around with giving it away for a dollar as some suggest here as solutions (see you in jail). AGAIN.. Apple did not invent the subscription model. If any other company comes out with a two product line up - phone and touch example, they will have to do some very fancy accounting to avoid what is already a standard in accounting practices with similar circumstances to what Apple has encountered. AGAIN.. APPLE DIDN'T COME UP WITH THIS PLAN ON PURPOSE - THEY CAME UP WITH IT BECAUSE THEY HAD NO CHOICE WITH A SUBSCRIPTION BUSINESS FORMAT THAT HAPPENS TO CROSS OVER INTO THE IPOD TOUCH PRODUCT USING THE SAME SOFTWARE.

DO YOU REALLY THINK APPLE COULD GIVE A CRAP ABOUT THE $10?.. WHAT THEY WANT TO DO IS SELL HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE. THE NAME AFTER APPLE IS "CONSUMER ELECTRONICS" .. ARE YOU ALL JUST STUCK IN A COMPUTER MIND SET OR CAN YOU ADAPT TO WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON NOW FOR OVER TWO YEARS?

D

If i was you buddy i would fix my post to stop screaming .

Dude ease the f up We are only discussing WHY. And after discussing it we now understand .we don;t agree but we get it .

So why don't we charge the iphone the same $10 software upgrade?
It's not the 10 dollars its feeling cheated .

While I admit it's not a slam-dunk, i think you are being a tad disingenuous here.

I was talking "computers" (Apple is formerly and still primarily a computer company), not "consumer devices. Cell phones (traditionally or traditional models at least), and the iPod classic are not really in this category for starters. You do have a point with the Apple TV. I didn't think of that device when I made my comments and it now makes me wonder if they are going to do some kind of content subscription model with that eventually. In any case, despite the fact that the Apple TV *is* a computer, most of it's users probably don't think of it as one.

Things like iPods are right on the bubble in that we never used to really think of them as "computers" per se, but now (especially with the iPod touch we do. Also, having owned many many PDAs I can tell you that OS upgrades for them as a category are most definitely not always free. It's such a big category that covers so much history and so many devices that you can't rally say much about that at all, at least not in such general terms.

The comparison between the iPod touch and an iMac that I made is (IMO) much, much closer to reality than the examples you gave, in that both of these things actually run OS-X, but with one running a modified, slightly dumbed down variety. Clearly it won't be long before the horsepower of these mobiles and the OS they run is virtually identical to the desktop machines as well.

My argument therefore is more that since the iPod touch is the first device in a new mobile computing platform, (that doesn't use the subscription model like the iPhone), if Apple allowed the updates to be for free, it would most definitely reflect on their desktop line.

Especially now people are getting used to lower and lower prices for OS updates (a new development being pushed almost entirely by Apple BTW), if they start giving them away for free, it won't long at all before people start to wonder why they have to pay for an OS update at all.

Concomitant to that, I would argue that it's just rude for people to complain about this given the incredible amount of work that goes into the update, the ridiculously *low* price that Apple is charging, the fact that Apple is in fact leading the way to lower and lower prices all the time, the fact that the last time people complained the price was cut in half, the likelihood that the price might be lowered even further, and the fact that Apple purposely leaves their servers open so people can basically rip it off and distribute it for free on teh Internets (if you're that kind of person that likes to rip stuff off.

I understand why people are confused by the whole thing, but just because a lot of stupid people cry like babies about it doesn't make me feel sympathetic.

Well my friend the avg. joe smoe knows nothing about gapp and stuff. He only see's the iphone people not being charged while he is being charged. Its that simple. It is not so well thought out or as diabolcal as you make it out to be.

The full version of Windows 7 Home Premium is priced at $199, with an upgrade from Vista or XP costing $119. The full version of Windows 7 Professional is $299, with upgrades going for $199. Windows 7 Ultimate is priced at $319, with the upgrade version at $219.

I can understand some iPhone owners waiting to see if the 3.0 Update causes problems or is wrought with bugs and issues like the 2.0 Update was. The 3.0 Update however, at least thus far, seems to be pretty solid. I'm not having any of the problems I had last year (as some people here are currently reporting about the 3.0 Update). If you are having problems since updating to 3.0, I'd suggest doing a clean restore of your iPhone (not from a backup) and then practicing the wise habit of cycling off and on your iPhone each time you update any of your apps to clear the cache. Turning your iPhone off once a day (e.g., when you go to bed at night) to clear the cache is also a good habit to get into as well.

As for the iPod Touch, it's an iPod, not a full-fledged PDA (and Apple isn't billing it as such), though many are clearly using it as a PDA. It's amazing how much Apple has brought to the Touch (and the entire iPod line, quite frankly). 3.0 adds even more functionality to a device that's already performing above and beyond its original intention. But it seems like the people complaining about the $9.95 upgrade fee expect more (or even expected the more they're now getting from the start) for nothing. The subscription model explains/justifies the fee. And the less-than-$10 fee seems entirely reasonable for a major OS Update. All the .x updates to the iPhone OS have all been (and should continue to be) free.

The iPhone/iPod Touch product lines are more akin to personal computers than consumer products like gaming consoles, lesser cell phones or even the lesser iPods (though they're gaining more functionality all the time). Steve Jobs referred to these products as "Post PC Devices" and more people should start recognizing them as complex and powerful computers rather than dismissing them as trinkets to be taken for granted. The software engineering that enables these devices to do what they're capable of is nothing less than amazing, and the software engineers and designers responsible should be rewarded for their efforts. I'm honestly surprised the iPhone OS 2.0 and 3.0 Updates didn't cost $9.95 for both iPod Touch and iPhone owners. It's about the software and it makes sense (to me) that this new mobile computing platform that Apple is helping (re)define follow the model already in place in the computer market: major OS (or X.0) Updates are paid upgrades and incremental (or .x) Updates to the major releases are free as they're usually bug and security fixes.

The improved performance and added features should make the 3.0 Update a no brainer for iPhone users. As an iPhone owner, I'd have gladly paid for the 3.0 Update if required (as I would have for the 2.0 Update last year). But minus the phone features, I can see how the upgrade fee could be a tougher sell for iPod Touch users.

Of their users, over 50% of Touch owners had upgraded to OS 3.0 by two days ago.

And the fee probably made a difference: over 75% of iPhone users had.

Which is not to say AdMob's collecting bad data--this is just one developer--but it's something to wonder about. Maybe Tapbots just has a certain user base who leans towards early adoption. But 50% vs. 1% is a huge difference.

I paid for the v2.0 because it added a feature (the app store) that, to me, was worth the money. However, most of the v3.0 features are really only useful to iPhone users. I won't be upgrading.

Oddly your list left out another Apple product with free point updates which I hear is still being manufactured: computers.

Of course, one key word in that sentence is "point" - if not for the "free" upgrade to iPhone users (from whom Apple gets a $$ cut from ATT every month) - it could be logically argued that 3.0 is more like going from Tiger to Leopard, i.e., a fully newly architected version rather than an upgrade. That is, I got like, what, 11 free point upgrades to the former (and a number for iLife and iWork), but was not offered a free copy of Leopard, and most of Appledom assembled seems copasetic with that as the "way it's done" with OS X.

I still don't fully understand the arcane workings of Sarbanes-Oxley (but feel in general it's a flawed law from what I can grok of it), nor why Apple accounts for iPod Touch sales differently than it does for Mac sales - dividing by 730, etc., ad nauseum. But even if there are clear reasons for the diff, there's still no mandate to make the price a half sawbuck, especially comparing the relatively tiny impact on the bottom line of the incremental revenue vs. the teeth-gnashing and headslaps generated.

If half of current touch owners upgrade over the next year, and you factor in download costs (server power, db updating and bandwidth, e.g.) and subtract the revenue from 3.0 apps not sold because they won't run on the un-upgraded installed base, you might in fact be looking at a net loss of revenue AND profit. And good will.

So my two cents is that if a fee must be charged for to serve the gods of GAAP (generally accepted accounting practices), everyone (including Apple) would benefit from the price being $1.99 or $2.99 so it would seem trivial and palatable, and I would certainly advise them to look beyond the glare from their green eyeshades.

Does the iPhone 3.0 OS enhance game performance? If not, then that's why so few have upgraded.

The teens and young adults don't care about cut'n'paste. There's no new hardware being added by the software update (somehow sending a new processor over the wire would be cool) and the rest is pretty phone specific.

While I appreciate the conclusions drawn here, there are a couple of points regarding the data: First, couldn't there also be a conclusion that some people are just cheap, for example, if a person chooses a free app (with ads) over the paid version (which in my limited experience so far - I've noticed that most "free" apps with ads offer a 'full' version if you pay), so couldn't one also conclude that most of the Touch owners buy the update and pay for their apps? Second, not free apps use the ad model, in fact, I tend to avoid those. And third, this data is for Saturday, couldn't it be that there's a difference to how the majority of iPhone users and iPod Touch users interact with their devices? I mean if you're an iPhone user the update has a lot more to offer you, but if you a touch users, well, I can seen these folks taking a little more time to update. I'd like to see this data for this coming Saturday.

My point here is that I think the conclusions should be taken with a grain of salt as it has some holes.

To say bluetooth is poorly implemented is gross understatement! It is flat out terrible .. I have tried 3 different sets of blutooth headphones, and one set of speakers, and the ipod will not remain connected to them for more than about 30 seconds.

This was a WASTE of $10.

On a related note, streaming audio over the iPod touch seems to automatically end at about 15 minutes every time I use an app for that. Is this a typical bug in the touch?

They should know by now that most consumer only want to buy thing from the App Store at 0.99$ or get it for FREE.

Get into the program and release a lite version for FREE or at most sell it for 0.99$ and you will get ton of purchase...

But the funny thing is that I wont even surprise if its the way a lot of consumer are thinking now. Especially looking at the downward spiral for the pricing on the App Store, one day a game is $9.99, then drop to $4.99 and shortly after to $0.99

Dude ease the f up We are only discussing WHY. And after discussing it we now understand .we don;t agree but we get it .

So why don't we charge the iphone the same $10 software upgrade?
It's not the 10 dollars its feeling cheated .

9

sorry if i read screaming. why don't you read what i said. if you feel cheated you would have to change the laws to change it. Don't get off subject on this and whine whine whine.. This isn't about apple choosing the way to handle subscription accounting presented by ATT and the competition. This is the way they are handling it. And, it is not because it is easier as mentioned in another post. it is because they simply had to go along with subscription method accounting in order to lower the price from $600 to $200 and be competitive on the street.

i don't think you get itl? or why would you feel cheated? you are really not getting it at all?